The present invention related to bird traps and, in particular, it relates to bird traps which trap birds having a natural instinct to nest or roost in darkened places.
Certain birds, such as sparrows and starlings, have a natural instinct to nest or roost in darkened paces. The inside of soffits and overhangs around houses and other buildings generally provide a favored nesting environment for these birds. Once these birds have entered the soffits and overhangs, it is difficult to remove the birds without endangering the lives or health of the birds. However, if the birds are not removed, the birds can cause damage to the structure of the building and create a genuine noisy nuisance for any occupants of the infested buildings.
A variety of bird traps are known in the art. Many bird traps, such as the traps described in the Wood et al U.S. Pat. No. 3,393,468 and the Krenson U.S. Pat. No. 4,779,373, rely on food or bait to entice birds to enter a wire or mesh trap. However, many bait traps lack complete effectiveness since during most of the year, birds have plenty of natural food in their environment. Therefore, many birds do not have the hunger necessary to entice them to enter the trap.
Other traps, such as the trap described in the Boyer U.S. Pat. No. 1,506,045, rely on happenstance to trap the birds. For example, the trap described in the Boyer patent includes a tubular entry positioned in a window. The tubular entry leads to a fabric or mesh container. Spring finger at the end of the tubular entry and adjacent the container prevent birds within the container from gaining access back into the tubular entry.
The Boyer patent teaches that the mesh container should be sufficiently permeable to allow air to flow into the building through the tubular entry. Therefore, the Boyer patent's trap does not rely on the a bird's natural instinct to nest or roost in a darkened area but, instead, birds enter the tubular entry of the trap on mere chance or in search of food. In addition, the birds are only trapped after traveling completely through the tubular entry and entering the container. Anywhere along the tubular entry, such as when the bird realizes that it is not entering a place to feed, the bird could turn around and leave the tubular entry without being trapped.
Still, there are other types of devices which actually remove flying animals, such as bats, from a certain area. The bat elimination device described in the Lafforthun U.S. Pat. No. 4,757,638 includes a tubular passage extending from a house or other building to an outside exit chamber. A perforated door on the exit chamber permits air to flow through the tubular passage. Accordingly, bats enter the tubular passage due to the bat's natural instinct to travel toward the source of an air current. There is no teaching or suggestion within the Lafforthun patent of actually trapping the bat, but only preventing the bat from reentering the house or barn. Unfortunately, since the bat is not immediately prevented from reentering the area upon entry into the tubular passage, the bat could reenter the house or barn once it has reached the exit chamber if the bat would not pass through the doorway.
The traps or elimination devices as described in the above patents do not rely on a bird's natural instinct to nest or roost in darkened areas. In fact, none of the above patents either teach or suggest a darkened area to lure birds to enter and to immediately trap the bird to prevent the bird from escaping the trap or device from the point of original entry.